House budget plan exposes differences with Senate

AUSTIN - The Texas House laid out its battle lines with the Senate Wednesday, overwhelmingly approving a $210 billion budget that exposes sharp differences with lawmakers on the other side of the Capitol Rotunda in key areas of public education, transportation and border security.

One of the biggest fights is likely to be over tax relief. Leaders of the both chambers have promised to cut taxes, but what form that takes remains up in the air.

House leaders have talked about offering as much as $4.8 billion in tax relief, possibly through reductions in sales taxes and business tax reductions.

The Senate, by contrast, already has voted to cut school property taxes for homeowners and business levies by $4.6 billion.

A mix of property and business tax relief is in line with broad parameters set by Gov. Greg Abbott.

"This budget may not have everything for every member in it, but I feel it is a great step in the right direction towards funding the House's priorities in the most effective and efficient manner possible," Appropriations Committee Chairman John Otto, R-Dayton, told fellow House members who gave final approval to the measure in a 141-5 vote.

While promising to "fight for those (House) priorities" in negotiations with senators, Otto said he was not drawing any lines in the sand.

"There's nothing that's non-negotiable," he said.

Translator

To read this article in one of Houston's most-spoken languages, click on the button below.

On March 6, Texas voters will decide who will carry the Democratic party's mantle into the battle for governor and a slew of other statewide offices. Click here for full coverage of the primary elections. Find our voters guide here.

The House plan leaves $8.4 billion in state revenue unspent, though about half of that can be spent only on dedicated purposes.

"There's been a lot of discussion about, 'Why are you leaving so much money on the table?'" Otto said. "That's because I don't know what tax cuts are going to look like yet for certain."

He said he would like to have "a little room" in negotiations with the Senate "to be able to move one way or another."

The House plan includes $7.7 billion more than the current two-year budget and would leave intact the state's "rainy day fund," which is projected to reach $11.1 billion by the end of the next two-year budget period.

Among differences with Senate budget writers, House leaders propose a $3 billion increase for public schools on top of covering enrollment growth, with an eye to reforming a school finance system that has been declared unconstitutional by a state district judge. The case is on appeal, and a number of lawmakers would rather wait for a Texas Supreme Court ruling before attempting to make wholesale reforms.

Senate budget writers would put $1.2 billion in general revenue into the basic student allotment over enrollment growth.

Both chambers also would put more money into transportation, with broad support for adding $1.3 billion by ending so-called diversions from the highway fund. On top of that, the House would add $1.5 billion in general revenue into transportation.

Senate budget-writers have proposed drawing $1.2 billion from a one-time dedication of the motor vehicle sales tax. The latter plan is in line with a larger Senate-backed initiative to dedicate a part of that tax revenue stream to transportation.

There also is House and Senate sentiment for adding money to border security. Senate budget writers would allocate more at $811 million, compared with $565 million backed by the House.

Both chambers would exceed the $343 million set aside by lawmakers for border security in the 2013 legislative session. That figure has grown to $467 million in the current two-year budget period.

Once the Senate approves its budget proposal, the two chambers will take up negotiations to reconcile the two spending plans.

Otto and other House leaders had a chance to polish their negotiating skills in the nearly 18-hour budget debate that culminated with an initial vote to approve the budget at 5:39 a.m. Wednesday, then a formal vote in the afternoon.

The "no" votes came from tea party-backed Republican Reps. Matt Rinaldi of Irving, Matt Schaefer of Tyler, David Simpson of Longview, Tony Tinderholt of Arlington and Molly White of Belton.

During the debate, House leaders avoided threatened battles over school vouchers and abortion funding, and they rebuffed tea party efforts to drain money from state economic incentive programs. The hours of discussion also included successful efforts by tea party-backed lawmakers on social issues.

Tea party-backed Rep. Stuart Spitzer, R-Kaufman, for example, set a goal of everyone staying abstinent until marriage - as he said he did - in successfully moving some money from prevention of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases to abstinence education.

Another, Rep. Scott Turner, R-Frisco, won approval of a ban on using budget funds to support research involving the destruction of a human embryo.

Tempers flared, as when Rep. Borris Miles, D-Houston, told Rep. Scott Sanford, R-McKinney, that he was "full of" it - using a vulgarity - for saying he wanted to trim the Lottery Commission to protect the poor. Miles cited other votes by Sanford that he said were against the poor.